Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 19 Apr 2000 01:14:52 -0400 (EDT)
From:      bill@bilver.com
To:        freebsd-isp@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Failover question/hint/idea
Message-ID:  <200004190514.BAA01389@mail.wanlogistics.net>
In-Reply-To:  

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Reply to: bill@bilver.com
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL61 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Sorry for not replying earlier - it was one of those days.  Brand new -
14 days old - Cicso 7120 died on me early Tuesday AM.

I had said:

>> An old client of mine is bringing up a portal site.  They current have
>> a T1 to their location, but the site is going to be put on a server
>> at our co-location facility - which is inside an OC-48 connected facility.
>
>> They are going to keep theri T1 and the current site as a development
>> site, but they want to be able to use that site as a fail-over site
>> in case the main site goes down.
>...
>> I can't t see that the round-robin DNS approach would work, but if the
>> primary DNS (located at tha main site) goes down, would that be enough
>> to force it to the secondary name server - which I'm thinking could
>> point to the backup site.


> If by "primary" and "secondary" you mean the normal DNS master and slave
> servers (this is the current terminology), it won't work:

Actually I was thinking more an an alternate - one listed as secondary
but not actually secondary for that one domain.

> - The master and the slave(s) are supposed to have the *same* data. The
> slave(s) fetch a copy of the zone data from the master.

I understand that.  I'm sorry for the poor choice of words.  I'm usually
better at communications than that.  :-(

> - The "rest of the world" do not differentiate between master and slave
> name servers - all they do is choose one of the *authoritative* name
> servers. Master and slave(s) are all supposed to be authoritative, of
> course.

> To put it another way: As seen from the outside, there is no difference
> between "primary" and "secondary" name servers!

I've seen a commercial product in the Sun arena that appears to be able
do this - including round-robin from multiple sites and replacing of
failed servers in the series - but I'm trying to find another way to
do this to start with.   It depends on just how successful the site
is.  If it takes off then their site on a T1 for backup will only
be development and not used as an emergency.

Bill
-- 
Bill Vermillion    bv@wjv.com




To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-isp" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200004190514.BAA01389>